What aircraft (any side) would you develope further

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules


I re-read the caption, it's the airbrake...

And the engine mock-ups were smaller than the engines, right?
 
And we've been calling the yaw control devices spoilers, which isn't correct as spoilers are designed to decrease lift by altering the flow over the uper wing surfaces, these devices are designed to create drag. They extend above and below the wing to create equal drag above and below the wing. They are basicly "fence type" airbrakes, like those on the inner wings of the Meteor.
 
Accelerate progress of the B-36 Peacemaker Bomber. An enlarged B-29 Stratofortress to fire-bomb Japan and Germany. It actually reached production in 1946 and although not used as a bomber gave sterling service in reconnaissance over Russia in the Cold War. It therefore would have given the Allies a greater edge in heavy bombing capability if the War had lasted a year longer...
 
Bombing from high altitude proved very difficult in the PTO due to jet streams.

And seing as ceiling would be the only real advantage over the B-29 (or you get into larger bombload per bomber vs larger numbers of B-29's) it would be moot. The B-36's would be sitting ducks with max speeds barely over 200 mph at medium altitudes, and these wouldn't be getting the jet boosters either. (which was one of the saving graces to the design, allong with the nuclear capability)

But in a conventional sense the'd be much harder to utilize and escort than B-29's or B-50's. (which had much better performance)
 
But was that lack of performance because they never reached their intended role or not? I am saying that engines would have been produced for them that would have given them suitable performance if they had been needed.
 

Well, that was the original reason for developing the B-36; Army Air Force planners anticipated losing England as an airbase, so they wanted to develop a bomber that could fly all the way from the East coast of the US to Berlin and back, AND carry a decent bomb load.
 
But even if that had occured there would be no escorts, and even if it flew above the ceiling of intercepting fighters, (assuming accuracy was acceptable, which it may not have been) development of a super high altitude fighter could have been done, and with more concentrated effort than occured in reality, as Germany would already be in better shape with England taken out.
 
I think I'd try to develope Bf 109G/K - it'll be longer, wider, it'll have aerodynamical canopy, main landing gear such as in Fw 190A (but shape from Bf 109), engine DB 605ASM or DB 603, tailwheel from Bf 109K, it'll be armed with one MK 108 cannon in engine and two MG 151/20 wing cannons (in such place as those in Fw 190A).
 
If America lost England as a base could they just use Scotland and Wales instead?

As for further developments I would have liked to see the Spiteful reach service, and maybe also the Jet Mosquito that DH were developing. I also agree that the Whirlwind developed to its full potential would have been great to see.
 
The "Me 209 II" had wide stance inward retracting landing gear. I believe 2x MG 151/20's had been proposed in addition to the 109G's main armament. (or possible in the nose, replacing the MG 131's)



Several variants of the Bf 109 already had retractable tailwheels. And the "aerodynimical canopy" I assume would be a teardrop or bubble type canopy similar to that of the Fw 190 or Me 262. The main advantages of these canopies is the improved visibility, in some cases aerodynamic drag may be reduced, but in others it may be detrimental.

I don't think such an aircraft would have any advantage over the Fw 190 fitted with the same engine.


There was also the more advanced Me 309 which was actually an earlier project than the Me 209-II. It was an entirely new aircraft however, and there were a fair amount of problems, particularly with the nosewheel arrangement.
 
This is off topic of course, but,

Iceland could have been used as a possible initial US base of operations. Working to regain the freedom of the UK and then move on to Europe. Alternatively the US would have had to work up form North Africa.


Of course sucessfully invading Britain is another issue alltogether, a recent discussion came up here: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/polls/best-battle-britain-aircraft-507-27.html

It may have been possible with proper tactics and coodination of their armmed forces. (and a combined air and sea invasion force) But I don't think it would be possible until 1941, and Hitler wouldn't be willing to invest the kind of time and resourses necessary with his eagerness to move on to the east.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

M
How Would You Like To Ride Here?
Replies
9
Views
679
Dimlee
What (or what would) make a good tactical recon aircraft in World War II
Replies
10
Views
1K
ColFord
D
What aircraft is that plane and which nation? Not Germnay for sure.
Replies
5
Views
232
Dr.Mabuse
D
N
Can you ID this wrecked aircraft?
Replies
7
Views
1K
fire-fox
F
Any Japanese claims on 10 July 1945?
Replies
0
Views
633
CHen10
Menu
Log in
Register